Intravenous versus oral etoposide: efficacy and correlation to clinical outcome in patients with high-grade metastatic gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (WHO G3)

Abir Salwa Ali; Malin Grönberg; Seppo W Langer; Morten Ladekarl; Geir Olav Hjortland; Lene Weber Vestermark; Pia Österlund; Staffan Welin; Henning Grønbæk; Ulrich Knigge; Halfdan Sorbye; Eva Tiensuu Janson

doi:10.1007/s12032-018-1103-x

Intravenous versus oral etoposide: efficacy and correlation to clinical outcome in patients with high-grade metastatic gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (WHO G3)

Abir Salwa Ali, Malin Grönberg, Seppo W Langer, Morten Ladekarl, Geir Olav Hjortland, Lene Weber Vestermark, Pia Österlund, Staffan Welin, Henning Grønbæk, Ulrich Knigge, Halfdan Sorbye, Eva Tiensuu Janson

Department of Clinical Medicine

6 Citations (Scopus)

23 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

High-grade gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEP-NENs, G3) are aggressive cancers of the digestive system with poor prognosis and survival. Platinum-based chemotherapy (cisplatin/carboplatin + etoposide) is considered the first-line palliative treatment. Etoposide is frequently administered intravenously; however, oral etoposide may be used as an alternative. Concerns for oral etoposide include decreased bioavailability, inter- and intra-patient variability and patient compliance. We aimed to evaluate possible differences in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients treated with oral etoposide compared to etoposide given as infusion. Patients (n = 236) from the Nordic NEC study were divided into three groups receiving etoposide as a long infusion (24 h, n = 170), short infusion (≤ 5 h, n = 33) or oral etoposide (n = 33) according to hospital tradition. PFS and OS were analyzed with Kaplan-Meier (log-rank), cox proportional hazard ratios and confidence intervals. No statistical differences were observed in PFS or OS when comparing patients receiving long infusion (median PFS 3.8 months, median OS 14.5 months), short infusion (PFS 5.6 months, OS 11.0 months) or oral etoposide (PFS 5.4 months, OS 11.3 months). We observed equal efficacy for the three administration routes suggesting oral etoposide may be safe and efficient in treating high-grade GEP-NEN, G3 patients scheduled for cisplatin/carboplatin + etoposide therapy.

Original language	English
Article number	47
Journal	Medical Oncology
Volume	35
Issue number	4
Pages (from-to)	1-7
Number of pages	7
ISSN	1357-0560
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1007/s12032-018-1103-x
Publication status	Published - 1 Apr 2018

Keywords

Administration, Oral
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Antineoplastic Agents, Phytogenic/administration & dosage
Disease-Free Survival
Etoposide/administration & dosage
Female
Humans
Infusions, Intravenous
Intestinal Neoplasms/drug therapy
Kaplan-Meier Estimate
Male
Middle Aged
Neuroendocrine Tumors/drug therapy
Pancreatic Neoplasms/drug therapy
Proportional Hazards Models
Retrospective Studies
Stomach Neoplasms/drug therapy
Treatment Outcome

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

10.1007/s12032-018-1103-xLicence: CC BY

Ali2018_Article_IntravenousVersusOralEtoposideFinal published version, 877 KBLicence: CC BY

Cite this

Ali, A. S., Grönberg, M., Langer, S. W., Ladekarl, M., Hjortland, G. O., Vestermark, L. W., Österlund, P., Welin, S., Grønbæk, H., Knigge, U., Sorbye, H., & Janson, E. T. (2018). Intravenous versus oral etoposide: efficacy and correlation to clinical outcome in patients with high-grade metastatic gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (WHO G3). Medical Oncology, 35(4), 1-7. Article 47. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12032-018-1103-x

Intravenous versus oral etoposide: efficacy and correlation to clinical outcome in patients with high-grade metastatic gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (WHO G3). / Ali, Abir Salwa; Grönberg, Malin; Langer, Seppo W et al.
In: Medical Oncology, Vol. 35, No. 4, 47, 01.04.2018, p. 1-7.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review

Ali, AS, Grönberg, M, Langer, SW, Ladekarl, M, Hjortland, GO, Vestermark, LW, Österlund, P, Welin, S, Grønbæk, H, Knigge, U, Sorbye, H & Janson, ET 2018, 'Intravenous versus oral etoposide: efficacy and correlation to clinical outcome in patients with high-grade metastatic gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (WHO G3)', Medical Oncology, vol. 35, no. 4, 47, pp. 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12032-018-1103-x

@article{e47e775adf654e1e8caaeba62bd23014,

title = "Intravenous versus oral etoposide: efficacy and correlation to clinical outcome in patients with high-grade metastatic gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (WHO G3)",

abstract = "High-grade gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEP-NENs, G3) are aggressive cancers of the digestive system with poor prognosis and survival. Platinum-based chemotherapy (cisplatin/carboplatin + etoposide) is considered the first-line palliative treatment. Etoposide is frequently administered intravenously; however, oral etoposide may be used as an alternative. Concerns for oral etoposide include decreased bioavailability, inter- and intra-patient variability and patient compliance. We aimed to evaluate possible differences in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients treated with oral etoposide compared to etoposide given as infusion. Patients (n = 236) from the Nordic NEC study were divided into three groups receiving etoposide as a long infusion (24 h, n = 170), short infusion (≤ 5 h, n = 33) or oral etoposide (n = 33) according to hospital tradition. PFS and OS were analyzed with Kaplan-Meier (log-rank), cox proportional hazard ratios and confidence intervals. No statistical differences were observed in PFS or OS when comparing patients receiving long infusion (median PFS 3.8 months, median OS 14.5 months), short infusion (PFS 5.6 months, OS 11.0 months) or oral etoposide (PFS 5.4 months, OS 11.3 months). We observed equal efficacy for the three administration routes suggesting oral etoposide may be safe and efficient in treating high-grade GEP-NEN, G3 patients scheduled for cisplatin/carboplatin + etoposide therapy.",

keywords = "Administration, Oral, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Antineoplastic Agents, Phytogenic/administration & dosage, Disease-Free Survival, Etoposide/administration & dosage, Female, Humans, Infusions, Intravenous, Intestinal Neoplasms/drug therapy, Kaplan-Meier Estimate, Male, Middle Aged, Neuroendocrine Tumors/drug therapy, Pancreatic Neoplasms/drug therapy, Proportional Hazards Models, Retrospective Studies, Stomach Neoplasms/drug therapy, Treatment Outcome",

author = "Ali, {Abir Salwa} and Malin Gr{\"o}nberg and Langer, {Seppo W} and Morten Ladekarl and Hjortland, {Geir Olav} and Vestermark, {Lene Weber} and Pia {\"O}sterlund and Staffan Welin and Henning Gr{\o}nb{\ae}k and Ulrich Knigge and Halfdan Sorbye and Janson, {Eva Tiensuu}",

year = "2018",

month = apr,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1007/s12032-018-1103-x",

language = "English",

volume = "35",

pages = "1--7",

journal = "Medical Oncology",

issn = "1357-0560",

publisher = "Humana Press",

number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Intravenous versus oral etoposide

T2 - efficacy and correlation to clinical outcome in patients with high-grade metastatic gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (WHO G3)

AU - Ali, Abir Salwa

AU - Grönberg, Malin

AU - Langer, Seppo W

AU - Ladekarl, Morten

AU - Hjortland, Geir Olav

AU - Vestermark, Lene Weber

AU - Österlund, Pia

AU - Welin, Staffan

AU - Grønbæk, Henning

AU - Knigge, Ulrich

AU - Sorbye, Halfdan

AU - Janson, Eva Tiensuu

PY - 2018/4/1

Y1 - 2018/4/1

N2 - High-grade gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEP-NENs, G3) are aggressive cancers of the digestive system with poor prognosis and survival. Platinum-based chemotherapy (cisplatin/carboplatin + etoposide) is considered the first-line palliative treatment. Etoposide is frequently administered intravenously; however, oral etoposide may be used as an alternative. Concerns for oral etoposide include decreased bioavailability, inter- and intra-patient variability and patient compliance. We aimed to evaluate possible differences in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients treated with oral etoposide compared to etoposide given as infusion. Patients (n = 236) from the Nordic NEC study were divided into three groups receiving etoposide as a long infusion (24 h, n = 170), short infusion (≤ 5 h, n = 33) or oral etoposide (n = 33) according to hospital tradition. PFS and OS were analyzed with Kaplan-Meier (log-rank), cox proportional hazard ratios and confidence intervals. No statistical differences were observed in PFS or OS when comparing patients receiving long infusion (median PFS 3.8 months, median OS 14.5 months), short infusion (PFS 5.6 months, OS 11.0 months) or oral etoposide (PFS 5.4 months, OS 11.3 months). We observed equal efficacy for the three administration routes suggesting oral etoposide may be safe and efficient in treating high-grade GEP-NEN, G3 patients scheduled for cisplatin/carboplatin + etoposide therapy.

AB - High-grade gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEP-NENs, G3) are aggressive cancers of the digestive system with poor prognosis and survival. Platinum-based chemotherapy (cisplatin/carboplatin + etoposide) is considered the first-line palliative treatment. Etoposide is frequently administered intravenously; however, oral etoposide may be used as an alternative. Concerns for oral etoposide include decreased bioavailability, inter- and intra-patient variability and patient compliance. We aimed to evaluate possible differences in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients treated with oral etoposide compared to etoposide given as infusion. Patients (n = 236) from the Nordic NEC study were divided into three groups receiving etoposide as a long infusion (24 h, n = 170), short infusion (≤ 5 h, n = 33) or oral etoposide (n = 33) according to hospital tradition. PFS and OS were analyzed with Kaplan-Meier (log-rank), cox proportional hazard ratios and confidence intervals. No statistical differences were observed in PFS or OS when comparing patients receiving long infusion (median PFS 3.8 months, median OS 14.5 months), short infusion (PFS 5.6 months, OS 11.0 months) or oral etoposide (PFS 5.4 months, OS 11.3 months). We observed equal efficacy for the three administration routes suggesting oral etoposide may be safe and efficient in treating high-grade GEP-NEN, G3 patients scheduled for cisplatin/carboplatin + etoposide therapy.

KW - Administration, Oral

KW - Adult

KW - Aged

KW - Aged, 80 and over

KW - Antineoplastic Agents, Phytogenic/administration & dosage

KW - Disease-Free Survival

KW - Etoposide/administration & dosage

KW - Female

KW - Humans

KW - Infusions, Intravenous

KW - Intestinal Neoplasms/drug therapy

KW - Kaplan-Meier Estimate

KW - Male

KW - Middle Aged

KW - Neuroendocrine Tumors/drug therapy

KW - Pancreatic Neoplasms/drug therapy

KW - Proportional Hazards Models

KW - Retrospective Studies

KW - Stomach Neoplasms/drug therapy

KW - Treatment Outcome

U2 - 10.1007/s12032-018-1103-x

DO - 10.1007/s12032-018-1103-x

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 29511910

SN - 1357-0560

VL - 35

SP - 1

EP - 7

JO - Medical Oncology

JF - Medical Oncology

IS - 4

M1 - 47

ER -

Intravenous versus oral etoposide: efficacy and correlation to clinical outcome in patients with high-grade metastatic gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (WHO G3)

Abstract

Keywords

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this